So some clown in a Jeebus mask has painted me a horrible shade of no-planer astroturf-green. I still love Jeebus, my tax-subsidized cradle-to-grave in-your-face baby-sitter.
The crew must have some red necks to go along with red faces, after an embarrassing mishap with a cannon. Concept department needs more turkeybasters.
So, you believe, that when an equal volume of thermite burns in contact with an equal volume of iron, the result of this reaction will be to heat the steel, not melt it, just heat it, to 1250C, and cool the thermite to 1250C. And this is with the fact presented to you in the NIST report that .13lbs thermite will melt 1lb of steel.
Ask your teacher about the difference between energy from conduction of heat, and energy released by a chemical reaction. Before you fail the course.
You don't seem to get it. We are not talking about just conducting heat through the steel. We are talking about melting it. If we wanted to transfer the heat from a thermite reaction through a column without melting the column, then you would have to spread out the heat of the reaction over a large surface area. WE DONT WANT TO DO THAT. WE WANT TO MELT THE STEEL.
YOU CANNOT POSSIBLY BE AN ENGINEER. REMOVE THAT LIE FROM YOUR PROFILE.
How stupid are you? By your logic, Cole's cutting device would have cooled the column, not cut it. YET HIS VIDEO CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES THE CUTTING.
Wanna know why your faces theory is wrong? Because the heat of the reaction is coming out of one face only, and any heat through other faces is much much lower, not an important factor (and not a cooler)
Holy shit, I pray you are not actually a practising engineer.
at 0:39 to 0:44 of the video, look at the white hot liquid pouring off the hood and through the grille. Looks just like the white hot liquid that was pouring out of the towers before the collapse.
Myth Busters, National Geographic, Popular Mechanics, History Channel <----- these are created for the simple minded and those who are too lazy or stupid to investigate for themselves. Myth Busters and Popular Mechanics did these bullshit Thermite experiments, while average Americans were cutting steel with thermite in their own backyards. 9/11 = 100% Inside Job WAKE UP!
That observation shack looks very similar to the ones used at New Mexico Tech and I wonder if this was shot there.
For more thermite tests done for media, as well as tests done by Jonathan Cole (who took the time to figure out how to make the stuff work) see my video:
It didn't even melt through a car. It couldn't even cut a car in half but they managed to simultaneously cut multiple beams in exact time with eachother to bring down 3 towers. Highly doubtful and according to this video impossible. Hell you see thermite uses gravity and burns down but truthers claim they were cutting horrizontal. Epic fail for the truthers. Thank you Myth Busters. Truther myth BUSTED.
and you will see a demonstration of cutting a steel beam with thermite, and only about 5 lbs of thermite, much less than the 100lbs of thermite that NIST claimed is required to cut a single beam.
Mythbusters has been BUSTED. and by an engineer on a shoestring budget and working in his backyard. Mythbusters should be humiliated.
above 800 degrees (which jet fuel burns at) steel looses 90% of its strength. combine that with the fact that a huge fucking plane hit the building and the amount of force pushing down on the weakened steel and you have your recipe for a falling building.
@tman2tuff Do you account for insulation? and everything being reduced to dust? rate of fall? Absence of resistance? Beams being cut a 45 degree angle? Molten metal weeks after the collapse? Perfectly symmetrical collapse? Stay in that science class... you might learn about scientific rigor.
At least you understand that this episode is related to 911- lots of poeple here don't seem to understand that. And you may be right about towers 1 and 2, but not WTC7, no plane hit that tower, its collapse was NOT related to any damage from falling debris, but "fire induced progressive collapse", a new phenomenon, it looks very much like a CD, but NIST dismissed that theory saying each column would require 100lbs of thermite to cut. Not true - see: watch?v=Qamecech9m4
no plane hit WTC7, NIST says its collapse is due to "fire induced progressive collapse", a new phenomenon, not any damage from any falling debris, yet its looks like a CD, but NIST says no way because each column would require 100lbs of thermite to fail it, something disproven by this fellow: watch?v=Qamecech9m4
NIST, the producers of the official report on the collapse of WTC7, are very clear in stating that the collapse of WTC7 was due to a totally new phenomenon called "Fire Induced Progressive Collapse", and that no damage from falling debris caused the collapse of WTC7.
So, every time you or someone else says 7 fell because of damage from falling debris, you are showing that you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about and that you didn't even do minimal research on 911.
um, okay... but when you are ready to stop flaunting your ignorance, check out the NIST report - it is considered by everyone who believes the official story (ie people like you), to be the authoritative report on what caused WTC7 to collapse. Now I don't believe "fire induced progressive collapse", but NIST rules out collapse of WTC7 being caused by damage from falling debris. "Common knowledge" doesn't cut it.
@xCmOn3yx777 It's only common knowledge, if your not dead set on blaming WTC on everyone OTHER then the people that actually did it..........terrorists from another country.
WOW, THIS IS FUCKING HILARIOUS! These trained engineers couldn't come up with the concept of using some kind of device to direct the energy of the reaction toward the surface they wanted to cut.
It would be like trying to build a rocketship by putting all the fuel in a big pile and placing the capsule on top of it, then after lighting it on fire and seeing that the capsule doesn't go anywhere, concluding that rocket flight has been proven impossible.
@9911MU51C Don't forget the Mythbuster team only had a set amount of time to prove their hypothesis. designing a means of energy direction for this material would have been an unnecessary use of time and effort because they still proved the hypothesis they made correct.
@9911MU51C i did some research and found out that It cannot melt through tungsten and a couple types metamorphic rocks. it is very difficult to focus the heat of thermite well enough to reach more than 3000 degrees F .
Thermite will melt ALMOST anything. The temperature it reaches is dependent on the proportions of metal oxide to aluminum present. Different Material = different proportion.
(btw, this video "shows" thermite won't melt the car roof, which is made of steel, so doesn't the video answer your question? it seems there are circumstances where burning thermite may be very near steel without melting the steel, I'm guessing the layer of non-burning thermite between the roof and the burning thermite acts like insulation. Any device only needs to survive long enough to direct the heat to the metal column - seconds.)
@7Hook this was a post to someone else but it will apply here as well.
i did some research and found out that It cannot melt through tungsten and a couple types metamorphic rocks. it is very difficult to focus the heat of thermite well enough to reach more than 3000 degrees F .
Thermite will melt ALMOST anything. The temperature it reaches is dependent on the proportions of metal oxide to aluminum present. Different Material = different proportion.
@7Hook this is from mythbusters they where seeing if plain thermite could melt a car in half like in the myth, the myth didnt say it was angled or controlled in any way
I bet there's a whooole lot of things you've never heard of. On this topic, go watch:
watch?v=Qamecech9m4
and you will see what you call an "amazing scientific breakthrough". Then come back here and post your thoughts, and maybe resolve in the future not to make sarcastic presumptuous comments on topics of which you are completely ignorant. Sure, this is youtube, and we all enjoy making that kind of comment but 911 is important enough to merit better quality thinking and comment
I just read a bit about rocket engines on wikipedia, I bet you've also never heard that rocket engines run with a combustion temperature as high as 3227 degree Celsius. That's about 700 degrees hotter than thermite, at 2500 degrees Celsius.
Woweee! You just found out TWO "amazing scientific breakthrough"s in one day! Does your new knowledge inspire you to now value learning higher than sarcasm?
I just read a bit about rocket engines on Wikipedia - bet you've also never heard that rocket engines run with a combustion temperature as high as 3227 degree Celsius. That's about 700 degrees hotter than thermite, at 2500 degrees Celsius.
Wow! You just found out TWO "amazing scientific breakthrough"s in one day! Does your new knowledge inspire you to now value learning higher than sarcasm?
@7Hook i don't know if they were attempting to cut it in half with the reaction process, or the molten iron that the process produces, but either way they're just fuckin around.
The only reason anyone who watches mythbusters would be interested in thermite and what it can do to steel is that there are claims that thermite was used to bring down WTC7 in a controlled demoltion. Mythbusters isn't just fuckin around, they are trying to form a belief in people that thermite could not have done the job, which is a false belief, in order to discredit the theory.
@7Hook If it could not slice through a car then it can't bring down a tower. Seriously your saying that thermite simultaneously cut all the beams in perfect sequence to make a controlled demolition. Honestly it's impossible.
@7Hook Thermite doesn't cut straight lines. Those beams were cut by ironworkers during cleanup, and they were cut at an angle so the wreckage would fall in a certain direction. There are pictures of it actually being done. At ground zero, no less.
Your belief is that to cut one column requires 4 containers of thermite that would be of a volume of the size of a VW and hundreds of tons. You believe the thermite had to be cooled. You also believe that the debris of WTC7 was searched for any form of thermite containers - even though the OCT asserts no CD. I don't know where you have gotten these beliefs, but they are wrong. go watch this video:
1. "Jonathon Cole took my suggestion for the containers used in his video!". Whatever. You are an OCTer, you wouldn't think of these things, you believe in fire induced progressive collapse
2. If there is heat transfer away from the thermite (which is completely irrelevant anyway), then cooling of the thermite would be unnecessary, contradicting your earlier point.
3. The size of Cole's device is nowhere near a VW, if the steel is 4 times thicker, then 4 times more thermite.
Good Lord, what is wrong with you? The amount of thermite mythbusters used in this video is completely irrelevant to how much would be needed to cut a column. NIST provided a number of 100lbs of thermite per column, ONE TENTH of what mythbusters used. BUT DON'T STOP THERE, because NIST says that amount of thermite is need to melt a FOOT LENGTH of a column, obviously unnecessary, so even less thermite is needed.
(And your profile says you're en engineer - another lie, I see)
I don't know why I would take your numbers over the numbers provided by NIST - 1000lbs/ft. But using your 2t/ft, the amount is still way under 1000lbs. Very simply:
1. When a pounds per foot measurement is given, you are measuring the pounds per foot of the whole column. In other words, you are not measuring the weight of a side, so do NOT multiply by 4.
2. A column will fail if you melt even an inch length. No need to melt a foot.
Knucklehead, when I said "the amount is say under 1000lbs" I'm talking about the amount of thermite. Fer fuck sake the sentence began with "BUt using your 2t/ft" ie 2 tons per foot. So an amount of 43 pounds can melt an inch of steel column 2tons per foot.
And cole showed you a device cutting one inch cut in steel beams.
Any admission that your math on the tons per foot length and thermite amount was abhorently bad for an "engineer" like you (ie you are not an engineer - ADMIT IT)
Have you figured out yet that a pounds per foot measurement of a column does not need to be multiplied by four, for four sides to the column, to get the pounds per foot of the column, and therefor the figure for the amount of thermite does not need to be multiplied by four?
You got blocked because you are an idiot. You are uninformed, you're thinking is muddled, yet you have such confidence in yourself that you can't see how ridiculous you are. C'MON MAN, TURN ON YOUR BRAIN!
ugh, its not just warm thermite that transfers heat. and besides, different materials have different heat capacities, so 2 cubes at 1250 is wrong unless they have identical heat capacities. That said, again, it is not hot thermite, it is BURNING THERMITE.
Seriously, there is something wrong with you. You can't think logically, you have a passing idea of some scientific principles, but they are all muddled and wrong. You are ignorant, no offense, its just a fact.
I'm waaaay past done talking with you. Give a buddy a laugh - show them this conversation. Especially a buddy that is an educated and qualified engineer. And if this buddy wants to talk to me, get him on here and we'll talk. I'm sure I'll enjoy it. LATER.
For a beam of 4000lbs per foot of length, the volume of the beam is:
4000lbs/ft3 divided by 490lbs/ft3
or 8.16 cubic feet.
We know the length -1 foot. If the beam is 4 feet by 2 feet, then we have a volume of 8 cubic feet. SOLID ALL THE WAY THROUGH. NOT A BOX WITH SIDES OF THICKNESS IF 4 INCHES, AS YOU CLAIMED EARLIER.
You are a liar, incompetent, uninformed, clueless, and irritating. GOOD BYE!
Okay. Lets find out its weight per foot. Break it down to 4 sheets of steel and find the volume. Its is an estimate, but overstates the volume, so no problem.
2 are 52x4x12 = 2496 cubic inches, or 1.4 cubic feet
2 are 22x4x12 = 1056 cubic inches, or 0.61 cub feet.
Total cubic feet 2.01
at 490lbs per cubic foot of steel
that is 984.8 pounds per column foot length, or about 1000lbs per foot.
As NIST said, AND SHOWING YOU ARE WRONG about 4000lbs per foot length
1. Nobody searched WTC7 for evidence of demo, esp not containers. Nevertheless, how to 'hide' containers? Design them to be consumed by the thermite as they do their job of cutting the beams. That's the kind of thing engineers know how to do.
2. "Thermall heat transfer..." No shit dumbass. The point Cole makes is thermite can do the job (contrary to this bullshit mythbusters video).
3. So larger device, but NOWHERE near the size of a VW. Plus, a funded pro could make a better device
"The point Cole makes is he can't make it work without containers" NO! WRONG! Cole's point is to contradict the authorities who say thermite can't be made to cut a steel column. You can see it implied in this video, you can see it on a BBC "Debunker" video where some guy puts 3 pounds of thermite on a steel beam, lights it, and shows the beam is completely unaffected. Cole proves thermite CAN CUT A BEAM. And just a small amount of thermite it needed, far less than what NIST says.
lmao ppl got to realize that this experiment was done under no pressure for the thermite lots of space to expand to build up pressure, put tat shit in a steel can and see it run throguh 2 inch of steel just like that
1000 pounds of thermite and it hasn't QUITE cleaved the roof of puny thin aluminum. ???? Surely ... 3000 pounds could get the job done on MASSIVE steel columns at the WTC??? (yes so believable and so practical!!!)
And NONE of you truther people see the absolute ridiculousness of this entire scenario??? Cause i sure as hell do.
When are you going to give up with these retarded conspiracy theories??
@roquefortfiles Check Jonathan Cole's video on NanoThermite911's channel asshole. He proved that it only takes less than 5 pounds of thermite to cut through a steel column.
@DollaBiIIz Oh.. OK.. asshole!! You mean with his oh so believable "Rube Goldberg Terrorist contraptions?".. Which would have to be put on to the steel behind sheet rock and electrical conduit?? and of which ZERO of these contraptions were found. And unfortunately the tower fails at the exterior wall columns.. Which are BOX COLUMNS and perfectly intact up to the moment of collapse and I am sorry but your thermite aint working in .05 of a second.
@roquefortfiles What are you talking about? Watch the video asshole. It's less than 15 minutes. The devices fit inside the access holes, not on the outside. The access holes are accessible. That's why they call them "access holes". How do you know the columns were "perfectly intact"? They are behind a facade. Were you behind that facade also observing the perfect intactness during the collapse? If not, what is your source for that?
@DollaBiIIz Oooh. the access holes!! The A. HOLES!!! oohh!! Dude. YOU watch the videos. The building collapse initiates from the exterior columns!!. Of which they are pretty much completely intact up to that point. Along the East wall at least. And i wonder if you would be so kind as to point out WHERE on a building 210 ft across with every window blown out across 3 floors... this gigantic thermite reaction is taking place..??
@roquefortfiles Yes, the columns had access holes. Swearing is not any kind of proof that they didn't have access holes. Watch any of the hundreds of videos of building collapses. The building normally looks perfectly intact up until the collapse initiates.
@DollaBiIIz Oh Mr A Hole? (that's access hole!!) Well isn't that convenient? And yet 150 pounds of this shit (a ridiculously huge and impractical amount btw) could do virtually nothing to a moderate sized steel column. Dude where is your brain at?? If this much thermite was in the building they would be finding it caked from one side of the building to the other!! And it does not act in .05 of a sec on the steel. A pop can sized amount of this shit aint bringing down the WTC. GET REAL!!!
@roquefortfiles Yes, asshole, the columns had access holes. DEBUNKERS were not able to do anything to a steel column with 150 pounds of thermite. If you would watch the video you would know that TRUTHERS (and demolition professionals) can cut all the way through a steel box column identical to those used in the WTC with less than 5 pounds of thermite in a pop can sized container.
@DollaBiIIz Oh.. So i guess that is why people like Mark Loiszeaux (a 30 year professional of building implosions) don't use them. As he put it.. "Its just not there yet otherwise i would be using it"..
Fella. The building collapses because the floors sagged and pulled away from their connections. You can CLEARLY see the exterior wall being bowed inward almost 5 feet in areas. Once those floors let go.. FORGET IT!! The exterior wall has no support. And that is exactly what happens.
@roquefortfiles watch?v=ucZag9-Cgyk<--- This video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
@roquefortfiles watch?v=ucZag9-Cgyk<--- This video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
@roquefortfiles watch?v=ucZag9-Cgyk<--- This video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
@roquefortfiles watch?v=ucZag9-Cgyk<--- This video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
@roquefortfiles watch?v=ucZag9-Cgyk<--- This video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
@roquefortfiles ucZag9-Cgyk<--- This video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
@roquefortfiles The video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Youtube won't let me post any part of the URL so you will have to scroll back to find it now. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
@DollaBiIIz Yeah pal i have seen it!!! And again. Point out to me on this building that is 210ft across with every window blown out across 3 floors Where this GIGANTIC thermite reaction is happening?? A reaction brighter than a welders torch!!! In to the SUPER ultra violet of the spectrum...???!! Because I SEE NOTHING!! REMOTELY APPROACHING THIS ... ANYWHERE on the building.
Wanna know why?? CAUSE IT AIN'T THERE!!! So stop your sell job on a ridiculous theory.
All my efforts to be "GREEN" have been defeated.
FirstFiveFrets 1 week ago
So some clown in a Jeebus mask has painted me a horrible shade of no-planer astroturf-green. I still love Jeebus, my tax-subsidized cradle-to-grave in-your-face baby-sitter.
CACBCCCU 2 weeks ago
Uh oh, I'm getting chewed out like that car. I think the chews are starting to get to me.
CACBCCCU 2 weeks ago
Медведя жалко
addntoxx 2 months ago
"Looks just like the white hot liquid that was pouring out of the towers before the collapse."
Consensus seems to be that's an anti-thermitic canard and, as we all know, scientific truth is a matter of consensus.
CACBCCCU 2 months ago
@CACBCCCU yet theres no evidence of it. i was there. saw the planes hit.
yamahonkawazuki 2 weeks ago
The crew must have some red necks to go along with red faces, after an embarrassing mishap with a cannon. Concept department needs more turkeybasters.
CACBCCCU 2 months ago
What planet do you live in that 1 ton = 1000lb?
TheLifeKa0tik 3 months ago
see 11.09. WTC!
ThePilot314 3 months ago
Comment removed
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
Oh, by the way, STEEL is 99.4 IRON, and THERMITE reactants
are about 90% iron, (After the aluminum oxide burns off), so
they DO have the same heat capacity.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
So, you believe, that when an equal volume of thermite burns in contact with an equal volume of iron, the result of this reaction will be to heat the steel, not melt it, just heat it, to 1250C, and cool the thermite to 1250C. And this is with the fact presented to you in the NIST report that .13lbs thermite will melt 1lb of steel.
Ask your teacher about the difference between energy from conduction of heat, and energy released by a chemical reaction. Before you fail the course.
7Hook 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@7Hook
YUP, because an equal volume of thermite weighs 1/6 that
of the steel beside it. In fact, it's not far off from the 0.13 that
NIST gives you. DUH
The DIFFERENCE is that 1/6 weight of the thermite, (about 80 lbs)
would melt 1/6 of the cube of steel, or about 80 out of 500 lbs
a cubic foot. DO the math, it's all there, and very consistent.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
I just realized it would be far less. The 80 lbs of thermite in a cubic foot, would
reduce down to less than 50 lbs of liquid iron at 2500 C, as the aluminum
burned off. Now you have 500 lbs of Solid Steel against 50 lbs of liquid iron.
Guess which wins?
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
Go right ahead. I am not the only one to show up with these calculations.
I can't help it if you get frustrated by conventional mechanical engineering.
Its YOUR problem, not mine.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
You don't seem to get it, you can't transfer the heat from the
thermite without surface to do it with. Steel only conducts
heat at a steady rate, and only so fast, so you need to apply
that heat at a large surface area, in order to beat the heat
dissapation rate of ten times the area.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
You don't seem to get it. We are not talking about just conducting heat through the steel. We are talking about melting it. If we wanted to transfer the heat from a thermite reaction through a column without melting the column, then you would have to spread out the heat of the reaction over a large surface area. WE DONT WANT TO DO THAT. WE WANT TO MELT THE STEEL.
YOU CANNOT POSSIBLY BE AN ENGINEER. REMOVE THAT LIE FROM YOUR PROFILE.
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
Hey, I am trying to cut you a break. A ONE INCH line of thermite would be overwhelmed
by the heat dissapations on FIVE faces of it's own volume, and five faces of the steel's
volume. You spread out the contact area in order to increase the heat transfer rate,
over the heat dissapation rate. Try heating an engine block with a kitchen match.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@7Hook
Count em, Fella, TEN FACES on both cubes exporting heat
at the same rate as the ONE FACE transferring heat between
the cube of thermite and the cube of steel, all at the same
rate. This is more of a thermite cooling system than a steel
heating system.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
How stupid are you? By your logic, Cole's cutting device would have cooled the column, not cut it. YET HIS VIDEO CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES THE CUTTING.
Wanna know why your faces theory is wrong? Because the heat of the reaction is coming out of one face only, and any heat through other faces is much much lower, not an important factor (and not a cooler)
Holy shit, I pray you are not actually a practising engineer.
7Hook 3 months ago
at 0:39 to 0:44 of the video, look at the white hot liquid pouring off the hood and through the grille. Looks just like the white hot liquid that was pouring out of the towers before the collapse.
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook fuck....are you kidding me? Conspiracy redneck, there is probably a UFO outside your house, go annoy that instead.
xTurquoiseGlazex 2 months ago
@7Hook Sure it does. Idiot...
Frosttty 2 months ago
@7Hook Yup, exactly what happens to glass when it melts in burning jet-fuel...
Ze3g0 2 months ago
@Ze3g0 And a bunch of other materials heated to meltingpoint.
Ze3g0 2 months ago
@Ze3g0
Googled: "melting point of steel"
Found: education.jlab.or g/qa/meltingpoint_01.h tml
Excerpt: "Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C"
Googled: "Melting point of glass"
found: hypertextbook.c om/facts/2002/SaiLee.sht ml
"Depending on it's composition, it can have a melting point of about 1400-1600 °C."
Plus, it is firemen witnesses that said molten steel was pouring out.
l00k33 1 month ago
@7Hook
looks more like the white hot liquid that was pouring out of ur mother after i fucked her well
666qwertz 3 weeks ago
They would have done better with 2000lbs of thermite...
tacocrusader 3 months ago
listen to the first 20 seconds of the vid without watching it...sounds dirty
soupie93 4 months ago 15
A Junk car...$50
1000 lbs of thermite...$3000
Releasing carcinogenic fumes...PRICELESS
AValidMember 4 months ago
pointless xD
DutchyVegas420 5 months ago
Thermite obviously brought down the WTC... Dump trucks and dump trucks of thermite. Makes more sense than holographic planes I guess.
orion1anon 5 months ago
@orion1anon yes dump trunks of thermite were brought into the WTC, which had 100,000 people cycle through it daily and no one noticed it, makes sense
xCmOn3yx777 5 months ago
Myth Busters, National Geographic, Popular Mechanics, History Channel <----- these are created for the simple minded and those who are too lazy or stupid to investigate for themselves. Myth Busters and Popular Mechanics did these bullshit Thermite experiments, while average Americans were cutting steel with thermite in their own backyards. 9/11 = 100% Inside Job WAKE UP!
Born2Flesh 6 months ago
hit 8 to hear him pur :)
9911MU51C 6 months ago
keep pressing 9
woolenitus 6 months ago
i watched it its one tone or 3000lbs
zigastrmsek1 6 months ago
@zigastrmsek1 1 ton is 2,000 lbs genius
xCmOn3yx777 5 months ago
this os not ment as real aducation
its ment to make ppl think they learnt somting
i have seen many episodes where they claim its busted while i as an normal person
see atleast 2 or more ways to easly make it work
its an misinforming program to dumb down ppl
like the episode that shooting at an car cannot ignite the fuel they proof that by shooting at an diesel car with an plastic gas tank
reemstrrr 6 months ago
thank you mythbusters, for giving our terrorist friends in the middle east an idea for destruction. thank you very much.
AcousticDude17 6 months ago
Use military grade thermite then it would do the job, like it did to wtc7
coolermasterpro 7 months ago
hahahah 9/11 WAS NOT an inside job . . .
keggerous 7 months ago
they used 2 tons in this not 1000lbs
Darthkiller3 7 months ago
next time those fags should take a seat inside of the suv
7llllllllll 8 months ago
That observation shack looks very similar to the ones used at New Mexico Tech and I wonder if this was shot there.
For more thermite tests done for media, as well as tests done by Jonathan Cole (who took the time to figure out how to make the stuff work) see my video:
Incendiary Experiments
punxsutawneybarney 9 months ago
1000lbs is not a ton...
matth61285 9 months ago 58
This has been flagged as spam show
what a bunch of cocksucking faggots
thenfm 10 months ago
Holy shit that's a lot of thermite
666leoandsatin 10 months ago
It didn't even melt through a car. It couldn't even cut a car in half but they managed to simultaneously cut multiple beams in exact time with eachother to bring down 3 towers. Highly doubtful and according to this video impossible. Hell you see thermite uses gravity and burns down but truthers claim they were cutting horrizontal. Epic fail for the truthers. Thank you Myth Busters. Truther myth BUSTED.
Bcm80 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Bcm80
correct your ignorance. watch this video:
ww w.youtube.com/watch?v=lIpa1K51os4
and you will see a demonstration of cutting a steel beam with thermite, and only about 5 lbs of thermite, much less than the 100lbs of thermite that NIST claimed is required to cut a single beam.
Mythbusters has been BUSTED. and by an engineer on a shoestring budget and working in his backyard. Mythbusters should be humiliated.
7Hook 10 months ago
@Bcm80
correct your ignorance. watch this video:
watch?v=lIpa1K51os4
Mythbusters has been BUSTED. and NIST has been BUSTED. Doesn't take a 100lbs of thermite to cut a beam, only about 5 lbs.
7Hook 10 months ago
@7Hook what the fuck that video you sent me too is this video. Epic fail of another truther lol.
Bcm80 10 months ago
@Bcm80
Here's the video smart ass:
watch?v=Qamecech9m4
and if you can' t get that working, go to my channel and watch the video titled
"Jonathan Cole - 9/11: Thermate Debate "
Now admit YOU ARE AN EPIC FAIL, as you idiots put it.
btw, how could an intelligent person believe that something which burns hotter than lava couldn't melt steel?
7Hook 10 months ago
@7Hook
there is no need to melt steel regardless
above 800 degrees (which jet fuel burns at) steel looses 90% of its strength. combine that with the fact that a huge fucking plane hit the building and the amount of force pushing down on the weakened steel and you have your recipe for a falling building.
tman2tuff 7 months ago
@tman2tuff Do you account for insulation? and everything being reduced to dust? rate of fall? Absence of resistance? Beams being cut a 45 degree angle? Molten metal weeks after the collapse? Perfectly symmetrical collapse? Stay in that science class... you might learn about scientific rigor.
skillzflux 6 months ago
@tman2tuff
At least you understand that this episode is related to 911- lots of poeple here don't seem to understand that. And you may be right about towers 1 and 2, but not WTC7, no plane hit that tower, its collapse was NOT related to any damage from falling debris, but "fire induced progressive collapse", a new phenomenon, it looks very much like a CD, but NIST dismissed that theory saying each column would require 100lbs of thermite to cut. Not true - see: watch?v=Qamecech9m4
7Hook 5 months ago
@tman2tuff
no plane hit WTC7, NIST says its collapse is due to "fire induced progressive collapse", a new phenomenon, not any damage from any falling debris, yet its looks like a CD, but NIST says no way because each column would require 100lbs of thermite to fail it, something disproven by this fellow: watch?v=Qamecech9m4
7Hook 5 months ago
@7Hook WTC7 collapsed from damage that a 20-50 ton plane engine caused when it fell from WTC1 into the building, at terminal velocity
xCmOn3yx777 5 months ago
@xCmOn3yx777
Not according to NIST.
7Hook 5 months ago
@7Hook just so you know, over a dozen buildings collapsed or were severely damaged from debris and the collapse of WTC 1 and 2
xCmOn3yx777 5 months ago
@xCmOn3yx777
NIST, the producers of the official report on the collapse of WTC7, are very clear in stating that the collapse of WTC7 was due to a totally new phenomenon called "Fire Induced Progressive Collapse", and that no damage from falling debris caused the collapse of WTC7.
So, every time you or someone else says 7 fell because of damage from falling debris, you are showing that you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about and that you didn't even do minimal research on 911.
7Hook 5 months ago
@7Hook i dont care what NIST says, its common knowledge WTC7 was hit by debris from the initial impact of WTC2 and sustained heavy damage from it
xCmOn3yx777 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xCmOn3yx777
"i dont care what NIST says"
um, okay... but when you are ready to stop flaunting your ignorance, check out the NIST report - it is considered by everyone who believes the official story (ie people like you), to be the authoritative report on what caused WTC7 to collapse. Now I don't believe "fire induced progressive collapse", but NIST rules out collapse of WTC7 being caused by damage from falling debris. "Common knowledge" doesn't cut it.
7Hook 5 months ago
@xCmOn3yx777
Marking my reply as spam won't change the facts or reality, no matter how hard you wish it to.
7Hook 5 months ago
@7Hook i didnt mark your reply as spam
xCmOn3yx777 5 months ago
@xCmOn3yx777 It's only common knowledge, if your not dead set on blaming WTC on everyone OTHER then the people that actually did it..........terrorists from another country.
zeppelin67637 5 months ago
@Bcm80 truthers lack real evidence
xCmOn3yx777 5 months ago 2
WOW, THIS IS FUCKING HILARIOUS! These trained engineers couldn't come up with the concept of using some kind of device to direct the energy of the reaction toward the surface they wanted to cut.
It would be like trying to build a rocketship by putting all the fuel in a big pile and placing the capsule on top of it, then after lighting it on fire and seeing that the capsule doesn't go anywhere, concluding that rocket flight has been proven impossible.
7Hook 10 months ago 35
@7Hook u do understand thermite melts steel, what would u make to direct it that wouldn't melt?
HAWX4 6 months ago 2
@HAWX4 theres a lot of things thermite cant melt, most of which would just fall through the hole the thermite would have melted
9911MU51C 6 months ago
Comment removed
HAWX4 6 months ago
@HAWX4 why was your comment removed O_o
9911MU51C 6 months ago
@9911MU51C i miss spelled some things and worded stuff wrong, but i re-posted it. it should be there now
HAWX4 6 months ago
@HAWX4 oh i thought the poster deleted it randomly XD
9911MU51C 6 months ago
@9911MU51C nope that was me hahaha
HAWX4 6 months ago
Comment removed
HAWX4 6 months ago
@9911MU51C Don't forget the Mythbuster team only had a set amount of time to prove their hypothesis. designing a means of energy direction for this material would have been an unnecessary use of time and effort because they still proved the hypothesis they made correct.
HAWX4 6 months ago
Comment removed
HAWX4 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@9911MU51C i did some research and found out that It cannot melt through tungsten and a couple types metamorphic rocks. it is very difficult to focus the heat of thermite well enough to reach more than 3000 degrees F .
Thermite will melt ALMOST anything. The temperature it reaches is dependent on the proportions of metal oxide to aluminum present. Different Material = different proportion.
HAWX4 6 months ago
@HAWX4
I'd make something like this:
watch?v=Qamecech9m4
(btw, this video "shows" thermite won't melt the car roof, which is made of steel, so doesn't the video answer your question? it seems there are circumstances where burning thermite may be very near steel without melting the steel, I'm guessing the layer of non-burning thermite between the roof and the burning thermite acts like insulation. Any device only needs to survive long enough to direct the heat to the metal column - seconds.)
7Hook 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@7Hook this was a post to someone else but it will apply here as well.
i did some research and found out that It cannot melt through tungsten and a couple types metamorphic rocks. it is very difficult to focus the heat of thermite well enough to reach more than 3000 degrees F .
Thermite will melt ALMOST anything. The temperature it reaches is dependent on the proportions of metal oxide to aluminum present. Different Material = different proportion.
HAWX4 5 months ago
@7Hook They did have a device to direct the thermite down on the SUV. It is called gravity. It probably has a profound effect on you fatass
jackd1990 6 months ago
@7Hook this is from mythbusters they where seeing if plain thermite could melt a car in half like in the myth, the myth didnt say it was angled or controlled in any way
9911MU51C 6 months ago
@7Hook I've never heard of a device that can withstand a temperature 3x hotter than lava... please do share your amazing scientific breakthrough.
KetsutaSama 5 months ago
@KetsutaSama
I bet there's a whooole lot of things you've never heard of. On this topic, go watch:
watch?v=Qamecech9m4
and you will see what you call an "amazing scientific breakthrough". Then come back here and post your thoughts, and maybe resolve in the future not to make sarcastic presumptuous comments on topics of which you are completely ignorant. Sure, this is youtube, and we all enjoy making that kind of comment but 911 is important enough to merit better quality thinking and comment
7Hook 5 months ago
@KetsutaSama
go watch:
watch?v=Qamecech9m4
and you will see what you call an "amazing scientific breakthrough".
7Hook 5 months ago
@KetsutaSama
I just read a bit about rocket engines on wikipedia, I bet you've also never heard that rocket engines run with a combustion temperature as high as 3227 degree Celsius. That's about 700 degrees hotter than thermite, at 2500 degrees Celsius.
Woweee! You just found out TWO "amazing scientific breakthrough"s in one day! Does your new knowledge inspire you to now value learning higher than sarcasm?
7Hook 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KetsutaSama
I just read a bit about rocket engines on Wikipedia - bet you've also never heard that rocket engines run with a combustion temperature as high as 3227 degree Celsius. That's about 700 degrees hotter than thermite, at 2500 degrees Celsius.
Wow! You just found out TWO "amazing scientific breakthrough"s in one day! Does your new knowledge inspire you to now value learning higher than sarcasm?
7Hook 5 months ago
@7Hook i don't know if they were attempting to cut it in half with the reaction process, or the molten iron that the process produces, but either way they're just fuckin around.
wiltse0 5 months ago
@wiltse0
Sure... this episode nothing to do with 911, oh yes I'm sure you are right, absolutely nothing to do with 911.
7Hook 5 months ago
@7Hook what are you talking about?
wiltse0 5 months ago
@wiltse0
The only reason anyone who watches mythbusters would be interested in thermite and what it can do to steel is that there are claims that thermite was used to bring down WTC7 in a controlled demoltion. Mythbusters isn't just fuckin around, they are trying to form a belief in people that thermite could not have done the job, which is a false belief, in order to discredit the theory.
7Hook 5 months ago
@7Hook If it could not slice through a car then it can't bring down a tower. Seriously your saying that thermite simultaneously cut all the beams in perfect sequence to make a controlled demolition. Honestly it's impossible.
Bcm80 4 months ago
@7Hook Thermite doesn't cut straight lines. Those beams were cut by ironworkers during cleanup, and they were cut at an angle so the wreckage would fall in a certain direction. There are pictures of it actually being done. At ground zero, no less.
You're dumb.
CubexDE 4 months ago
@7Hook
These trained engineers didn't use containers to direct the energy of the reaction,
because containers for the reaction were NOT found in the debris pile.
Remember, to heat steel with thermite you have to COOL THE THERMITE,
and essentially, weld it to the column attacked. IF it's a FOUR SIDED box core
column, it's worse. NOW you have FOUR containers (About the size of a VW
Bug) welded to the sides of a core column. We are talking about a LOT of
Iron / Steel, 100 TONS. No Way, Fella.
Merlin5by5 5 months ago
@Merlin5by5
Your belief is that to cut one column requires 4 containers of thermite that would be of a volume of the size of a VW and hundreds of tons. You believe the thermite had to be cooled. You also believe that the debris of WTC7 was searched for any form of thermite containers - even though the OCT asserts no CD. I don't know where you have gotten these beliefs, but they are wrong. go watch this video:
watch?v=Qamecech9m4
and try to learn.
7Hook 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@7Hook
Really, Seriously, you are THAT stupid? Jonathan Cole took my suggestion
for the containers used is his video! They are screwed into his 1/10th scale
I-Beam. The steel in that I-beam is at most 1 inch thick. A WTC I-beam
is FOUR inches thick, and has an interior space nearly 2x2. The interior
doesn't transmit heat, dumbass, so you have to attack all four sides.
And you don't know that heat transfer TO the steel involves heat transfer
AWAY FROM the thermite? Really?
Merlin5by5 5 months ago
@Merlin5by5
1. "Jonathon Cole took my suggestion for the containers used in his video!". Whatever. You are an OCTer, you wouldn't think of these things, you believe in fire induced progressive collapse
2. If there is heat transfer away from the thermite (which is completely irrelevant anyway), then cooling of the thermite would be unnecessary, contradicting your earlier point.
3. The size of Cole's device is nowhere near a VW, if the steel is 4 times thicker, then 4 times more thermite.
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
4. Quit talking about huge containers, that's your own personal strawman, so just drop that bullshit.
5. Why do you need to lie?
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
The claim about HUGE containers, being VW sized is NOT made Willy Nilly.
YOU can see the volume of thermite right on this video. Take all the bags
that MYTHBUSTERS piled on top of the SUV, and they would fill a VW quite
easily, LOL. Total volume for 1,000 lbs of thermite is about 80 cubic feet.
The NWO Ninjas would need at least 1,000 lbs per core column, and this
container would have to survive 2500 C temps.
Take a look at the cubic footage of a VW Bug interior.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
Good Lord, what is wrong with you? The amount of thermite mythbusters used in this video is completely irrelevant to how much would be needed to cut a column. NIST provided a number of 100lbs of thermite per column, ONE TENTH of what mythbusters used. BUT DON'T STOP THERE, because NIST says that amount of thermite is need to melt a FOOT LENGTH of a column, obviously unnecessary, so even less thermite is needed.
(And your profile says you're en engineer - another lie, I see)
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
LMAO, Niels Harrit suggested 100 TONS of thermite total, and 1000 lbs of
thermite per column, in his own TV and Newspaper interviews. That number
was echoed by Steven Jones in his thermite paper, but then he presents
evidence of a PAINT thickness of Nano thermite applied to the steel, which
makes no sense in any physical sense. Please post your NIST reference,
Because Thermite loads are determined by the amount of steel you
are trying to heat. WTC Core columns were 2 tons/ft
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
Presenting to you, for the first time, the NIST Q&A of the WTC7 investigation:
ww w.nist.go v/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm
where you will find NIST stating .13lbs of thermite is needed to melt a pound of steel. And refer to columns of1000lbs per foot.
So, to melt
1ft of 1000lbs/ft - 130lbs thermite
1 inch - 10.8lbs thermite (very light)
Or, your 2tons per ft melt 1 inch of column - 43 pounds of thermite - one person could heft that.
ie, nowhere near 1000lbs thermite
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
OK, so I just got done telling you the core columsn were two tons per linear foot.
60 tons for a 30 foot column, Now multiply 4,000 lbs for a linear foot by .13,
and you get 520 lbs, and core columns have FOUR sides, 4 times 520=2,000
lbs, so I am trying to teach you basic math now?
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
I don't know why I would take your numbers over the numbers provided by NIST - 1000lbs/ft. But using your 2t/ft, the amount is still way under 1000lbs. Very simply:
1. When a pounds per foot measurement is given, you are measuring the pounds per foot of the whole column. In other words, you are not measuring the weight of a side, so do NOT multiply by 4.
2. A column will fail if you melt even an inch length. No need to melt a foot.
There is no way in hell you are an engineer.
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
TWO TONS is 4,000 lbs, DUMBSHIT. Not only that, but you can't apply
THERMITE to just one inch of steel, it's got a volume over 80 cubic feet.
IF you did, your thermite would be spread out over 100 feet away.
Even if you exposed ONE, THREE SQUARE FT of core column steel
wall to THREE cubic feet of thermite, you would need 3 cubes deep
hanging on each of four walls to get half the volume Harrit predicted.
Do this with some play blocks, and see if you understand.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
Knucklehead, when I said "the amount is say under 1000lbs" I'm talking about the amount of thermite. Fer fuck sake the sentence began with "BUt using your 2t/ft" ie 2 tons per foot. So an amount of 43 pounds can melt an inch of steel column 2tons per foot.
And cole showed you a device cutting one inch cut in steel beams.
Any admission that your math on the tons per foot length and thermite amount was abhorently bad for an "engineer" like you (ie you are not an engineer - ADMIT IT)
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
Well, you lose again. There are four sides to a core column, and an air gap.
Not only do you lose heat to the rest of the column (the OTHER 29 Feet),
but you lose heat to the air gap in the middle of the column.
The CORE columns at the WTC were four inches thick. Doesn't that imply
you have to scale up both in terms of physical size, but also in heat loss?
DO THE MATH, Kooktard. It's simple for an engineer.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
Have you figured out yet that a pounds per foot measurement of a column does not need to be multiplied by four, for four sides to the column, to get the pounds per foot of the column, and therefor the figure for the amount of thermite does not need to be multiplied by four?
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
Nope, I figure you are heating at least TWO feet of core column above and below
the ONE foot directly being heated with the thermite. OR did you think you could
contain the thermite heat in just the one foot of steel you are touching?
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
Just watch Cole's experiment again. And remember, he is working by himself, and doing it in the space of his backyard on a tiny budget.
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
I did watch Cole's experiment, and pointed out it's stupidities even then.
He responded by blocking me, as he didn't have any answers either.
SUCKS to be a twoofer, I guess.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
You got blocked because you are an idiot. You are uninformed, you're thinking is muddled, yet you have such confidence in yourself that you can't see how ridiculous you are. C'MON MAN, TURN ON YOUR BRAIN!
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
I am the only one here to offer accurate math to support my arguments.
4,000 lbs x 0.13 = 520 lbs, not 43, that was particularly laughable,
and enjoyably muddle headed. Use Windows calc from now on, ok?
911research. w tc7. n et/wtc/ arch/ core. ht ml
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
that's to melt a foot length, which obviously not necessary.
AND DAMN WELL DONT NEED TO MULTIPLY THE FOOT LENGHT WEIGHT BY FOUR BECAUSE THE COLUMN HAS 4 SIDES AS YOU SAID BEFORE ( OR DID YOU FORGET?)
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
SURE you do (Have to melt each side separately).
What heat is transferred thru the air gap in the middle of the core column? ZERO.
Easy.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
right, need a device on each side
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
Given TWO CUBES of thermite and steel, both at room temperature.
The thermite ignites, and heats to 2500 C, and PERFECT heat transfer, with no losses,
You get TWO cubes at 1250 C. Conservation of heat.
Simple.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
ugh, its not just warm thermite that transfers heat. and besides, different materials have different heat capacities, so 2 cubes at 1250 is wrong unless they have identical heat capacities. That said, again, it is not hot thermite, it is BURNING THERMITE.
Seriously, there is something wrong with you. You can't think logically, you have a passing idea of some scientific principles, but they are all muddled and wrong. You are ignorant, no offense, its just a fact.
7Hook 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
I'm waaaay past done talking with you. Give a buddy a laugh - show them this conversation. Especially a buddy that is an educated and qualified engineer. And if this buddy wants to talk to me, get him on here and we'll talk. I'm sure I'll enjoy it. LATER.
7Hook 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
4000 pounds per foot (an overstated amount)
.13 lbs thermite to melt a pound
DONT NEED TO MELT 1 FOOT
4000lbs per foot divided by 12 (melt only 1 inch) times .13lbs thermite per pound steel:
That's 43 pounds to melt your imaginary column
Or for NIST's column of 1000lbs per foot, to melt an inch (good enough to fail a column),
that 10.8 pounds of thermite.
TEN POUNDS
7Hook 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
Okay, no dimensions.
Let's do some math.
The density of steel is 490lbs per cubic foot.
For a beam of 4000lbs per foot of length, the volume of the beam is:
4000lbs/ft3 divided by 490lbs/ft3
or 8.16 cubic feet.
We know the length -1 foot. If the beam is 4 feet by 2 feet, then we have a volume of 8 cubic feet. SOLID ALL THE WAY THROUGH. NOT A BOX WITH SIDES OF THICKNESS IF 4 INCHES, AS YOU CLAIMED EARLIER.
You are a liar, incompetent, uninformed, clueless, and irritating. GOOD BYE!
7Hook 3 months ago
The WTC core columns at the corners, the most important, were / had
(outside dimensions of 36 inches by 36 inches, with others 36 x 16) Others had larger dimensions, nearer the base of the building,
measuring 52 inches square, or 52 inches by 22 inches.
The building core columns were built in 5 ZONES of strength / mass.
Need the source?
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
Okay. Lets find out its weight per foot. Break it down to 4 sheets of steel and find the volume. Its is an estimate, but overstates the volume, so no problem.
2 are 52x4x12 = 2496 cubic inches, or 1.4 cubic feet
2 are 22x4x12 = 1056 cubic inches, or 0.61 cub feet.
Total cubic feet 2.01
at 490lbs per cubic foot of steel
that is 984.8 pounds per column foot length, or about 1000lbs per foot.
As NIST said, AND SHOWING YOU ARE WRONG about 4000lbs per foot length
7Hook 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
Gimme the dimension you have for the core column, in feet.
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
LETS PERFORM A SIMPLE EXPERIMENT (That's backed up by this video).
Let's assume a CUBIC FOOT of thermite is lined up next to a CUBIC FOOT of steel.
YOUR CUBE of thermite has SIX FACES, and only ONE is transferring heat.
The OTHER five faces are exporting heat to the environment, or container.
The STEEL on the other hand, has COLD STEEL on the opposite FIVE FACES
to export YOUR heat to the environment, or the rest of the steel column.
Do you see the problem yet?
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@7Hook
1. Jonothan Cole uses containers NOT present in the WTC debris pile, and
has to attach them with a beefy Screwed in attachment because of the thermal
expansion and pressure spikes of burning thermite / thermate.
2. Thermal transfer of heat from thermite to steel is basic to your theory.
Cooling of the thermite would leave BLACK IRON welded to any steel.
That's the weakness of this dumb ass theory, no black iron was ever found.
3. WTC steel beams are way larger than Cole's I-beam.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
1. Nobody searched WTC7 for evidence of demo, esp not containers. Nevertheless, how to 'hide' containers? Design them to be consumed by the thermite as they do their job of cutting the beams. That's the kind of thing engineers know how to do.
2. "Thermall heat transfer..." No shit dumbass. The point Cole makes is thermite can do the job (contrary to this bullshit mythbusters video).
3. So larger device, but NOWHERE near the size of a VW. Plus, a funded pro could make a better device
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
1. The FBI PENTBOM investigation sure DID search WTC 7 for explosives.
PANY and FDNY have the two largest Bomb Dog groups in the WORLD.
MORE than 500 SAR rescue dog teams from all over the country investigated
the WTC plaza collapses, including WTC 7. Bomb Dog scans proceeded
every SAR dog team, to keep The SAR teams from becoming new victims.
2. The point Cole makes is he can't make it work without containers.
3. You want to argue the scale of the containers that didn't exist?
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
@Merlin5by5
"The point Cole makes is he can't make it work without containers" NO! WRONG! Cole's point is to contradict the authorities who say thermite can't be made to cut a steel column. You can see it implied in this video, you can see it on a BBC "Debunker" video where some guy puts 3 pounds of thermite on a steel beam, lights it, and shows the beam is completely unaffected. Cole proves thermite CAN CUT A BEAM. And just a small amount of thermite it needed, far less than what NIST says.
7Hook 3 months ago
@7Hook
Watch the first 3 minutes of Jonathan Cole's video about thermite.
The First example Fails, and even he concedes, IN HIS OWN VIDEO, that thermite
might not be able to cut thru steel. Then he brings up containers, which was
suggested to Twoofers, and which they Angrily denounced as NOT necessary.
Kevin Ryan did so himself. Then, the containers worked.
My, how their stories changed after that.
Merlin5by5 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@7Hook
OH, and by the way, THERMATE is 29% Barium Nitrate, versus 2% Sulfur.
Check it yourself. To supply the sulfur in the FEMA example would require
100 lbs of thermate, (and 29 lbs of Barium Nitrate). BN is FLUORESCENT
dumbass, Over 100 TONS of thermite / ate, would provide 29 TONS of
Barium nitrate fluorescing like a halloween show by the Black lights used
by PANY and NYPD Bomb and SAR to find blood trails.
DO THE MATH, BONEHEAD, that's easy even for a truther.
Merlin5by5 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@7Hook
LMAO, do we have to mention that these HUGE containers and 29 TONS
of Barium Nitrate have remained TOTALLY unfound, TOTALLY unseen,
and NEVER claimed in PREVIOUS Truther claims, like Steven Jones's
reports? Did Jonothan Cole Mention THAT?
Merlin5by5 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@7Hook
These trained engineers didn't use containers to direct the energy of the reaction,
because containers for the reaction were NOT found in the debris pile.
Remember, to heat steel with thermite you have to COOL THE THERMITE,
and essentially, weld it to the column attacked. IF it's a FOUR SIDED box core
column, it's worse. NOW you have FOUR containers (About the size of a VW
Bug) welded to the sides of a core column. We are talking about a LOT of
Iron / Steel, 100 TONS. No Way, Fella.
Merlin5by5 5 months ago
A Segway??? Really GUYS really??
Magcomplex 10 months ago
This guy cuts steel beams with small amounts of thermite. watch?v=ucZag9-Cgyk
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
lmao ppl got to realize that this experiment was done under no pressure for the thermite lots of space to expand to build up pressure, put tat shit in a steel can and see it run throguh 2 inch of steel just like that
soulpimps 11 months ago
1000 pounds of thermite and it hasn't QUITE cleaved the roof of puny thin aluminum. ???? Surely ... 3000 pounds could get the job done on MASSIVE steel columns at the WTC??? (yes so believable and so practical!!!)
And NONE of you truther people see the absolute ridiculousness of this entire scenario??? Cause i sure as hell do.
When are you going to give up with these retarded conspiracy theories??
roquefortfiles 1 year ago
@roquefortfiles Check Jonathan Cole's video on NanoThermite911's channel asshole. He proved that it only takes less than 5 pounds of thermite to cut through a steel column.
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
@DollaBiIIz Oh.. OK.. asshole!! You mean with his oh so believable "Rube Goldberg Terrorist contraptions?".. Which would have to be put on to the steel behind sheet rock and electrical conduit?? and of which ZERO of these contraptions were found. And unfortunately the tower fails at the exterior wall columns.. Which are BOX COLUMNS and perfectly intact up to the moment of collapse and I am sorry but your thermite aint working in .05 of a second.
Got anymore nonsense?
roquefortfiles 11 months ago
@roquefortfiles What are you talking about? Watch the video asshole. It's less than 15 minutes. The devices fit inside the access holes, not on the outside. The access holes are accessible. That's why they call them "access holes". How do you know the columns were "perfectly intact"? They are behind a facade. Were you behind that facade also observing the perfect intactness during the collapse? If not, what is your source for that?
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
@DollaBiIIz Oooh. the access holes!! The A. HOLES!!! oohh!! Dude. YOU watch the videos. The building collapse initiates from the exterior columns!!. Of which they are pretty much completely intact up to that point. Along the East wall at least. And i wonder if you would be so kind as to point out WHERE on a building 210 ft across with every window blown out across 3 floors... this gigantic thermite reaction is taking place..??
Cause i see NOTHING!!!
You're on crack pal.
roquefortfiles 11 months ago
@roquefortfiles Yes, the columns had access holes. Swearing is not any kind of proof that they didn't have access holes. Watch any of the hundreds of videos of building collapses. The building normally looks perfectly intact up until the collapse initiates.
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
@DollaBiIIz Oh Mr A Hole? (that's access hole!!) Well isn't that convenient? And yet 150 pounds of this shit (a ridiculously huge and impractical amount btw) could do virtually nothing to a moderate sized steel column. Dude where is your brain at?? If this much thermite was in the building they would be finding it caked from one side of the building to the other!! And it does not act in .05 of a sec on the steel. A pop can sized amount of this shit aint bringing down the WTC. GET REAL!!!
roquefortfiles 11 months ago
@roquefortfiles Yes, asshole, the columns had access holes. DEBUNKERS were not able to do anything to a steel column with 150 pounds of thermite. If you would watch the video you would know that TRUTHERS (and demolition professionals) can cut all the way through a steel box column identical to those used in the WTC with less than 5 pounds of thermite in a pop can sized container.
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
@DollaBiIIz Oh.. So i guess that is why people like Mark Loiszeaux (a 30 year professional of building implosions) don't use them. As he put it.. "Its just not there yet otherwise i would be using it"..
Fella. The building collapses because the floors sagged and pulled away from their connections. You can CLEARLY see the exterior wall being bowed inward almost 5 feet in areas. Once those floors let go.. FORGET IT!! The exterior wall has no support. And that is exactly what happens.
roquefortfiles 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@roquefortfiles watch?v=ucZag9-Cgyk<--- This video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
Comment removed
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
Comment removed
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
Comment removed
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
Comment removed
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
Comment removed
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
Comment removed
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
Comment removed
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
Comment removed
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
Comment removed
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
Comment removed
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@roquefortfiles watch?v=ucZag9-Cgyk<--- This video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@roquefortfiles watch?v=ucZag9-Cgyk<--- This video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@roquefortfiles watch?v=ucZag9-Cgyk<--- This video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@roquefortfiles watch?v=ucZag9-Cgyk<--- This video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@roquefortfiles ucZag9-Cgyk<--- This video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
@roquefortfiles The video shows a steel box column being cut with less than 5 pounds of thermite. Youtube won't let me post any part of the URL so you will have to scroll back to find it now. Your refusal to watch it is akin to a child plugging their ears and shouting "I can't hear you!" over and over. Where is the video that shows you 5 feet of bowing?
DollaBiIIz 11 months ago
@DollaBiIIz Yeah pal i have seen it!!! And again. Point out to me on this building that is 210ft across with every window blown out across 3 floors Where this GIGANTIC thermite reaction is happening?? A reaction brighter than a welders torch!!! In to the SUPER ultra violet of the spectrum...???!! Because I SEE NOTHING!! REMOTELY APPROACHING THIS ... ANYWHERE on the building.
Wanna know why?? CAUSE IT AIN'T THERE!!! So stop your sell job on a ridiculous theory.
It ain't happenin
roquefortfiles 11 months ago